DRAFT / RESEARCH IN PROGRESS — NON-BINDING FCM LEGAL OPINION. NO FINAL HOLDING.
Question presented
Whether detention, public denunciation, physical coercion, confiscation, forced displacement, suppression of religion and education, and displacement of ordinary legal institutions during the Cultural Revolution could satisfy the ROC constitutional order applicable from 1966 onward.
Controlling constitutional principles
- Articles 7–9 — equality, personal liberty, judicial process and protection against military trial of civilians.
- Articles 10–14 — movement, expression, correspondence, religion, assembly and association.
- Article 15 — existence, work and property.
- Article 16 — petitions, complaints and legal proceedings.
- Articles 22–24 — residual rights, lawful/necessary restrictions and accountability for unlawful official infringement.
Preliminary analysis
A political campaign cannot substitute mass organizations, ad hoc committees or ideological accusation for legally constituted arrest, detention, courts and remedies. Article 8 makes lawful organ, lawful procedure and judicial adjudication central conditions for deprivation of liberty. Confiscation and occupational deprivation implicate Article 15 and require legal authority independent of political labeling.
Where coercion was committed by non-state actors, the record must distinguish private violence, tolerated violence, delegated authority and direct governmental action. State responsibility cannot be assumed merely from historical context; it must be tied to orders, control, ratification, failure to protect where a legal duty existed, or other legally cognizable conduct.
Opposing position and emergency powers
The strongest opposing argument invokes revolutionary necessity, emergency power and preservation of public order. The draft view is that even an emergency theory must identify a lawful ROC source of power, competent decision-maker, scope, duration and review mechanism. General political necessity cannot itself erase Articles 8 and 23.
Record-development rule
This family will be divided into individual reviewable cases: unlawful detention and death; property confiscation; religious persecution; educational/occupational expulsion; and institutional displacement. No movement-wide damages or criminal-liability conclusion is reached in this draft.
Next gates: date-specific ROC emergency statutes; representative primary orders and victim files; causation/control analysis; limitation/repose and transitional-justice issues; adversarial review.
Free China 